3 ms·
Sadly many ("smart", "rock star") devs I've seen are content with shortcut, local maxima solutions that only buy a little bit of time before the team starts hur
by michaelochurch 15y ago
Sadly many ("smart", "rock star") devs I've seen are content with shortcut, local maxima solutions that only buy a little bit of time before the team starts hurting again. I don't know why this is. Maybe b/c it's more fun (or feels safer) to code and produce behavior than to do the vigilant things required to stave off complexity.
General intelligence is a necessary condition, but far (very, very far) from a sufficient one for being a good programmer. Most of the inept developers I've met have been smart. Intelligence wasn't the problem.
This is why I hate Java and C++. Because it's impossible to evaluate code for quality in these languages at 200-500 LoC (while you can easily do this in Python or Scala) you can't hire based on code samples. So you have to hire based on general intelligence + interviewing skill and you end up with about 15% of your team being outright duds (worse yet, intellectually brilliant and persuasive duds because they passed your hiring process, but still bad programmers and dismal architects) even if you're extremely selective.
- Tommabeeng 15y agoAlan Kay expresses something similar: http://tele-task.de/archive/video/flash/14029/ http://tele-task.de/archive/video/flash/14029/ "Knowledge is silver. Outlook is gold. IQ is a lead weight." (~00:30)
- michaelochurch 15y agoThat was a great talk. It was really interesting to me that the initial vision behind object-oriented programming was diametrically opposite to the disaster that it has become.